Perry: “The American Revolution was fought in the 16th Century”
The Texas Governor followed his poor debate performance with a spectacular gaffe.
By James Maxwell Published 12 October 2011 14:02
Mitt Romney was the run away winner of last night's Bloomberg/Washington Post GOP presidential primary debate in New Hampshire. The former Governor of Massachusetts, who received the endorsement of Republican big-hitter Chris Christie shortly before he went on air, looked confident and relaxed as he discussed the economy and his proposed response to the twin crises of soaring unemployment and stagnant growth.
In an attempt to win over the Republican right - without which he will probably not be able to secure the nomination - Romney said that, if elected to the White House next November, he would sack current Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and replace him with someone in the mould of Milton Freidman, the late doyen of free-market economic theory. He also repeated the charge that President Obama "lacks the necessary private sector experience" to get the American economy working again.
In contrast, Rick Perry - who was under a huge a amount of pressure to win the debate following the publication of a series of polls showing a steady decline in his support - put in a hopelessly amateurish performance, frequently stumbling over fairly basic economic points.
Worse still, on a tour of Dartmouth College after the debate the Texas Governor made the astonishing assertion that the American Revolution was "fought in the 16th Century". In a convoluted statement to a crowd of assembled students and press, he said:
Our Founding Fathers never meant for Washington, D.C. to be the fount of all wisdom. As a matter of fact, they were very much afraid of that because they'd just had this experience with this far-away government that had centralized thought-process and planning and what you have you. And then it was actually the reason that we fought the [American] Revolution in the 16th century -- was to get away from that kind of onerous crown, if you will.
Perry must avoid gaffes like this at all costs. Obama's campaign team is going to be relentless in its efforts to present the Republican nominee, whoever he or she is, as the natural successor to George W. Bush who, of course, had an unrivalled habit of committing exactly these sorts of spectacular historical and linguistic blunders.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists





















9 comments
That idiot. He wants to run our country and he can't even get a simple history fact right?! Go back to school then maybe I will think about voting for you!
I didn't know that Katy Perry was standing for President?
I agree with swatantra nandanwar's comment. As I read the article, I sensed a vague smugness in reporting Perry's vocal typo. WHY must Perry avoid such gaffes? Similar opposition smugness didn't diminish georgebush's potency during his 8 years. You can despise a person, but smugness won't make him go away.
Didn't the American War of Independence begin in 1775 and conclude in 1784? Facts, stumbling blocks to the truth??!
It wouldn't surprise me if this was intentional, so that it would be commented on and the Republicans could easily point to the 'liberal elites' who hold 'ordinary working Americans' in contempt. A perfect message for the swivel-eyed Tea Party nutters.
But then George still went on to win against the machine plitician Gore the Bore. The voters like their politicians with a bit of character and usually dumber than themselves. People like Bush and Reagan and Carter.
Thats why Obama has to watch himself and not come across as the Smart Alec he undoubtedly is.
Obama won because the Republicans had an extremely poor candidate in MaCain.
McCain was indeed a very poor candidate and made some crucial mistakes (e.g. IMO calling off his campaign, Palin, ...) but is there anyone among the Republican frontrunners who stands head and shoulders above him?
Dave,
Many thanks for identifying the silly mistake. It has been removed.
James
As I watched the Republican Primary Debate last night, I was pleased that Karen Tumulty, national political correspondent for the Washington Post, questioned the candidates about the relative health of Main Street and Wall Street in the midst of recession. I have to admit, I was a little surprised by the unanimity of denial regarding the culpability of Wall Street. Continue reading →http://outlierideas.com/2011/10/12/occupy-wall-street-common-ground-and-revelations/